So after all the drama and "great concern" in the west about allegations of fraud in the Iranian elections it is now widely believed that the puppet regime in Afghanistan has committed fraud on a massive scale.

Yet this is somehow not a major story occupying hours of coverage:)

The reason of course is obvious.
The present puppet regime needs to remain to further U.S interest.

Too bad for the guys that risked getting blown up to cast the ballot (Its not about you guys...sorry).

I doubt it a lot that even 10% of Afghans went out to vote,most are illiterate,they are still tribal(you "vote"for your own group chieftain)and they are at war...and in societies such as theirs you know what everybody else does.Those "elections"are a soap directed by Nato(which by the way seems to be "shaking" over Afghanistan....)The election of either Karzai or Abdullah is rather indiferent to ordinary Afghans...and ,dont know,but I think the trouble was that for USA perhaps Abdullah would be preferable,as of late Karzai isnt all that shut up.

There is no democracy but imperialism. Where is the dictatorship of the majority? Like how democracy should work.

Once an empirialist always an imperialist. Especially when you come to know that Bin Laden doesn't even exist at all.

In what sense does he "not exist"?
At this point those who try to pretend I am an "American hater" never seem to read:)

I believe he is real and that he attacked the U.S.


Now is it realy so difficult for the occupiers to have a "pool of puppets" so that they can have a fair but meaningless election?

Yep, my country joined the coalition for money. Billions of euros for the new fibre DSM invented. For the new bullit proof vests. Contracts, that's what it goes about.

Remember the Patriots and the Goalkeepers of the 1st Gulf war against Saddam? For new contracts Garth, it's a game.

Know what Hitler did, during the Spanish civil war? That's what we're doing in Afghanistan, testing new weapons for new contracts worth many billions.

Afghanistan is the new testing field.

Plausible and likely.
However is it not likely that Osama attacked and then the situation was merely exploited rather than the U.S.A "fabricating" Osama and attacking themselves?

I think they did. The Twin Towers could have hold 5 plains and still they collapsed after one crash. And was it possible that it looked like a demolition with dynamite. So perfect that it did damage any other building.

It was the federal government hungry for more power.

*didn't damage

^_^ The Twin Towers could have hold 5 plains and still they collapsed after one crash.

Collapsed after TWO crashes from TWO airplanes full of fuel. The fire from the fuel became so intense it melted major steel beams that supported the building. After the beams melted, the stories above them fell down and started a chain reaction all the way to the basement.

Originally, the towers were designed with an eye for wayward planes to crash into it. Years later, larger airplanes than the original plans took flight and a pair of them hit the towers.

^_^ And was it possible that it looked like a demolition with dynamite.

It's unlikely that dynamite would MELT steel beams.

^_^ So perfect that it did damage any other building.

The falling towers did damage several surrounding buildings. It almost completely leveled a multi-story hotel next to it.

Additionally, this was NOT the FIRST time the building had been attacked by terrorists.

There have been numerous reports on how the fire would weaken the support to an extent where a collapse would occur.

If one chooses to still think the U.S did it to themselves then what else could convince them?

There is a big difference between what the U.S claims their defensive capabilities are and what they realy are.

Many have been fooled into thinking of the U.S as having the inteligence and defensive capabilities to make such attacks impossible...such ppl simply fell for a myth.